Efforts to bring glitzy new graphics to Linux are fueling an old conflict: Does proprietary software belong in open-source Linux? The issue involves software modules called drivers, which plug into the kernel at the heart of the open-source operating system. Drivers let software communicate with hardware such as network adapters, hard drives and video cards.

If I were selling computers with Linux pre-installed, do you think I could get away with saying "Oh by the way, since believe in complete open source, I didn't install the closed source drivers for your fancy nvidia card in there. So you won't be able to play any 3D games, or use any 3D screensavers without it being incredibly slow. But hey, you're using a completely open source and free operating system"

They would look at me like I was a moron and say "Aren't the nvidia drivers provided for free by nVidia, since am buying their hardware?"

They would be right. Normal (sane) people don't care if they have proprietary software, in fact most people welcome it, because let's face it OPEN SOURCED SOFTWARE WILL NOT FILL EVERYONE'S NEEDS. Some people may need Maya, that's not open source, yet we still see people saying it must be all free.

Hardware support is the most important advantage of any distribution, and if they're not going to FULLY support all the hardware that they can, that's just stupid.